If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Ok, I stayed out of the Sacramento game because frankly I was still (and still am) fuming about that loss to the Suns.

I didn't want to rain on a win so I just bit my tongue and moved on. I didn't want to point out that it took Kevin Martin missing two bunnys late in the game or that Travis Diener was hitting more shots than he had all season combined.

You know the old statement, a win is a win, afterall.

So now we move onto this game with the Warriors and I just want to ask one question for all of those who are advocating our newest and latest lineup change.

What the h@ll are we doing?

No, really, what are we doing?

Is this a long term plan where this is how we will play for the next 5 years? Is this a stop gap measure just to stop the losing? Are we trying to develop the young players?

A show of hands, who actually thinks this will be the way to win in the east in a playoff series?

Ok, if this is not about winning in the playoffs what is it about?

Look, I'm fine with any of the above answers I guess. But I just want to know what the plan is.

My guess is that this is just a stop gap measure to try something new to get some wins and make the Simons goal of reaching the playoffs.

This cute lineup will work against the two teams we just played and we will play both of them again this week so for now it is fine.

But I can't wait till we try and small ball the Pistons. Oh that will be fun. Ah who am I kidding no matter what lineup we use they will spank us.

Anyway, I guess I'm just confused about why all of a sudden we are having a lineup change again.

On to the game.

I don't want to hear one word from any of the Jackson fans on here about how our fans treat good old Jax. Look I always said our fans were unfair to him but after that reception that Dunleavy just got Jacksons trips to the fieldhouse are like a welcome home parade for military hero's.

It's to bad that we blew what was a pretty good overall game for him.

Now why did we lose?

Well there are a number of things you could say led to our defeat.

How about Jamaal Tinsley's childish flagrant 1 that lit Montana Ellis on fire?

How about Jamaal Tinsley's inability to even pretend to slow down any of thier point guards who decided to drive the lane.

How about we got a full frontal view of why if Travis Diener isn't hitting his shots that he is mostly a liabilty on the floor.

But mostly how about a coach who thinks that an open three point shot is like the holy grail, not realizing that in any NBA game the opponet will give you a free open three all game long at some position knowing that you are most likely going to hit it at about 30% of the time.

Sorry, I think I will not talk about O'Brien tonight for fear that my thoughts on that Pheonix game are still tainting my thoughts. Yes, I still 100% blame him for that loss.

Were we beat by the better team tonight? My answer is yes so I guess what is there to gripe about.

Right now we are one of the worst teams in the league and I just don't even know how to dig out of this.

Oh, I guess I should give this up so I don't get scolded for not recognizing.

Jermaine O'Neal played one hell of a game. Now if we could only get him to play against 6'8" centers the rest of the year we will be in business.

I'm tempted to just erase all of this because frankly it's just filled with to much negativity.

But frankly right now I am lost as to what we are doing. Once I figure that ourt I guess I will feel better.

Again another question.

Long term, does anybody think Danny Granger should be the 4?

I would advocate trading away Foster and Diogu if it wasn't for the fact that in about 3 weeks when this hasn't worked Foster at least will be back for sure.

Diogu to be honest with you probably should be moved & I actually liked Ike. But he is not going to fit into this system and is far to concerned with his shots to be of any real use.

That end of the game play drawn up by O'Brien was pure genius wasn't it?

Can you imagine what Dwight Howard is going to do to us?

Oh well to end on something positive, at least Marquis played well.

Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Tinsley's play last night really, really bothered me for the reasons you mention Peck. The problem I have isn't that Jamaal was unable to stop their point guards from beating him, the problem is that he didn't even try to stop them. In earlier games he was in a defensive stance - last night he was not His attitude on the court last night was a disgrace and an embarrasment. I could theorize as to why it was, but it really doesn't matter, he was JT from the last two years, the JT that I hated.

Other than that though, Peck I have to disagree with you with. I hate that Jeff isn't playing, but I think small ball is the best way for this Pacers team to win games. It gets Williams on the floor, it gets Rush on the floor. Of course I would replace Murph with jeff, because the interior defense and rebounding when Murphy was the only "big guy" was a joke. But small ball is the way to go. Ike doesn't fit this system and he needs to be traded, because he has more value to this franchise as trade bait then he does as a player.

Jeff will play a lot of minutes when they need his defense - like against Howard, I'm not worried about that.

I really wanted the Pacers to win last night for Dunleavy - I just don't understand why the fans are so hustle towards him. Did he ever embarrass the franchise, did he ever badmouth the franchise - No, he left with class. it is the fans fault that they thought they were getting the next Larry Bird or Dirk when they drafted Mike. But more than that it seems like the media and the fans in the bay area have something personal against him

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

I think by any objective measure, the pacers have played a lot better in the past three games after going to small ball

Very true. The only thing that bothered me was that, Marquis and Tins wouldn't take it to Baron Davis, when he fully had 4 fouls. If we got him out of the game, we would have won. It would have definately changed the game even though Monta Ellis was on a hot streak

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Just the standard stuff. Booed during pre-game intros and booed everytime he touched the ball or was inbounding the ball.

I have good seats, but not THAT good of seats, so I couldn't hear any taunts.

It's hard for me to guage how bad it was when Dunleavy was booed on a regular basis when he was a Warrior.....but I thought it was pretty bad.

IMHO...."standards stuff" is when fans "boo" the best player on the opposing team.....or booing opposing players when they attempt a FT.

Although I am clearly biased cuz I actually liked Dunleavy as a player both as a Warrior and Pacer....my impression was that the level of "booing" was on the level when fans just hates a particular player.

Those are the starting PF's in the league. How many of those guys would actually have an advantage over Danny that wasn't equalized by a disadvantage on their own part? I count 10 (Garnett, Nowitzki, Gasol, West, Randolph, Aldridge, Duncan, Bosh, Boozer, and Jamison). That's a fair bit, but it's not huge.

What it comes down to is this: Would you rather have Rush, Quis, and Williams getting more minutes, or Murphy, Ike, Harrison, and Foster getting more minutes? I'll take the former.

I do have an issue with Murphy playing over Foster, but that's not the point of this thread.

I wonder if the Warriors get those two key offensive rebounds last night if Foster's in the game?

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

When you're at a size disadvantage doing things like boxing out will minimize some of the disadvantages. ...Of course even if you are at a size advantage, boxing out will put the other team at even more of a disadvantage (cough cough did you read that JO?).

-Bball

Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

------

"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

This is going to be the umpteenth time I've posted it, but I don't get the big stink about boxing out, or lack there of.

John Wooden didn't teach his teams to box out, and he's considered one of, if not the, greatest coaches of all time. He taught that all 5 players should go after the ball, and not retreat to find a man, and essentially going the opposite direction as the ball.

JO's lack of boxing out might, or the whole team's, might not be the lack of talent/desire/ability/knowledge to do so. It could be JOB's coaching philosophy. It could be that JO feels like he's better just going after the ball.

One thing is definately for sure. Foster doesn't box out, and I've yet read someone *****ing about him not rebounding enough.

I don't particularly like JO as a player, but sometimes it feels like people will use a player's shoe size as a way to talk negatively about them.

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

If that's what Wooden truly believed, then to that I can only say "Nobody's perfect". If everyone boxes out someone, then they all have less distance to travel to get the ball, and they have a straight(er) line to travel to get to the ball. It's pretty simple to me. Jumping and the timing of your jump is important to rebounding, obviously, but the point is boxing out makes rebounding easier on you and harder on your opponent.

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

If that's what Wooden truly believed, then to that I can only say "Nobody's perfect". If everyone boxes out someone, then they all have less distance to travel to get the ball, and they have a straight(er) line to travel to get to the ball. It's pretty simple to me. Jumping and the timing of your jump is important to rebounding, obviously, but the point is boxing out makes rebounding easier on you and harder on your opponent.

Amen, it is also much more satisfying to see one of your players put a hard check on someone, throwing them completely out of the picture, and jumping up for a hard two-handed board and just crushing the rock upon contact. Mean, physical rebounds get my rocks off..i'm sorry to go there but how a player rebounds says a lot about his on court demeanor and desire to WIN.

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

I think Wooden wanted his players to put a body on a man, box him out, and then go get the ball. Until I see something disputing that I will stick to my belief. I think what Since 86 is saying, but confusing with not boxing out at all, is that Wooden didn't want his players neglecting the ball once they'd boxed their man out and protected an area. But I don't think Since 86 is correct that Wooden didn't want his players to box out at all.

But... I've not really heard/read Wooden's actual comments on the subject so I could well be wrong. Surely, someone here could post some actual Wooden comments to shed some light on this.

-Bball

Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

------

"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Second, I agree that Foster should have seen some playing time last night (1/13/08) against the Warriors especially when they had their reserves on the floor (less Ellis, of course; he was a beast last night!), but I can understand why JOB didn't go that route. Foster doesn't poss as much of a scoring threat as Murphy. Granted, Murphy didn't do so hot himself last night, but can you imagine defenders shagging off Foster and doubling our only other hot hands on the night, Dunleavy and Quis, when JO wasn't on the floor? Against a quick team like the Warriors, unless you can find the right combination out there to pair Foster against where his lack of offensive firepower won't be such a liability, you're better off leaving him on the bench for the most part. Still, I'd liked to have seen Foster get some playing time at least in the 3Q when the Pacers could have used a few more 2nd shot opportunities.

The only explanation I can give you about Tinsley is he was in one of his pouting modes again. I noticed before the game when the Pacers where in their huddle how Tinsley was the only player NOT paying attention or looking inward toward the huddle. It wasn't like something else had his attention. It was as if he just didn't really want to be part of it. I had a sense then that something would go wrong during that game, and sure enough...he pulled a hockey move out of his *rse! I know this, if I were JOB I'd sit him down every time he pulls a stunt like that. In fact, I wouldn't play him in end-game situations (that final 3 minutes) unless I had to. I know the flagrant foul wasn't committed during the final 3-minutes, but it's his overall attitude that seems to cause him to loss it that's hurting him and the team right now. Besides, Tinsley's end-game decision making hasn't been the best of late. I'm just not sure he can handle the end-game "go-to-guy" pressure in the clutch or be counted on to make sound decision near the end of games to get this team clear through to the win. Sometimes, it's the little things that mean a lot, and he's just not doing those little things when it's crucial that they matter most of all.

I agree somewhat on your view on Ike. He's not the same player we saw emerging before his injury. He's regressed in the worse way. Maybe by JOB keeping him out of the lineup he'll get to watch and learn and get some practise time in because w/o another strong big to hold down the interior while JO is rotated out, this "1-4" lineup will have flashes of success, but won't BE as successful as it could be. Of the remaining bigs - Murphy, Foster, Ike, Harrison - only Ike has the ability to be that 8-10 ppg front-court player. Murphy doesn't like playing underneath the basket. Foster can only give you "gimme putbacks". So, unless they aren't there, he's not going to score much. Harrison is more likely to foul out that put points on the board. That leaves Ike, but his decision making is slow, and he tries too hard to power through defenders rather than making a power move to create space for himself, and he goes straight up with the ball instead of using some of that athleticism he has. This team needs to take a lesson from the Rockets and Lakers and hire a Big Man coach bad!!

I think JOB is going in the right direction with this lineup. As UB mentioned, the Pacers have looked better since going to it. Their defensive rotations are better, their shot selection has been better and they've begun to attack the basket more. If the Pacers can get that one forceful low-post player to spare JO, this lineup could work because only one other team in the East is using it - the Magic! - and until recently, they had some pretty good success with it. But like the Pacers, they're missing that one "big" to spare Dwight Howard, as well.

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Phoenix does pretty well with small ball. They have not won a title with it, but you can't make EVERY move you make based on answering that question when you are not even good yet. Besides, who's to say they can't win a title or couldn't previously have one a title with that setup? I know they didn't and haven't, but it wasn't a situation of "why did they bother? There was no chance they would win."

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Since no one has brought this up yet, I'm gonna just come out and say it......I don't think that Small Ball is going to work based off of the way this team is built.

A big part of it is that this feels more like a "Hey, this small lineup seemed to work against the Suns, we should do this all the time" knee-jerk coaching reaction then a well thought out plan.

I don't have to play a few more games of Small Ball to know that any team that plays us is simply going to attack the basket everytime ( A ) JONeal is the last player to make it back to the other end of the court ( cuz he tried to grab an offensive rebound and is still trailing ) or ( B ) whenever Murphy is on the court. This is what the Warriors did last night especially when JONeal started getting tired.

The only way that I can remotely tolerate the idea of Small ball with the current roster is to have Murphy and Foster play at the same time so that it AT LEAST looks like we have a decent chance of defending ( or more specifically clogging up ) the paint. As some have suggested before....Murphy and Foster seem to compliment each other well....I think that we should take advantage of that.

On top of that...JONeal averaged 36 minutes as the Center over the last 2 games when Murphy averaged only 14 minutes. I am guessing that a BIG REASON for this was because Murphy wasn''t cutting it on the defensive end ( which really isn't a surprise ). Without adding Foster to the mix....does anyone else think that JONeal can continue to keep this pace when we face teams that actually has 2 real FrontCourt players?

Even with JONeal doing very well against a Frontcourt lineup where he was the Biggest Frontcourt player on the court, unless we play the Warriors and Suns for the rest of the season....I just don't think that JONeal is in the condition to do what we need him to do as the only true Big Man on the court for 30+ minutes a game.

Re: Odd thoughts to wrap up the road trip.

Look, a big reason why I've always defended Rick was because I felt like he made choices meant to reduce risk and hide weak spots. People may hate the slower pace that results in, people may find his underspoken demeanor boring, but to me the reason the team ended up playing the style they did was because it gave them the best possible chance to win.

I don't think JOB is dumb anymore than Rick was. I think JOB is finding his way into this roster. Perhaps he was naive coming into the job, but as he gets results and deals with these guys long term he's probably going to push closer to what Rick did. Sure it will still be with his style to it, but ultimately he's facing the same limitations Rick did.

The roster is a mess, that's why the coaches have struggled with it. People ripped on Rick for putting Tins in the doghouse or "playing favorites", but now we see JOB doing the exact same thing. Is that pure chance or does it indicate something about the roster?

What this means is that I'm partially with Peck and partially with Will. There is a method to this, but at the same time it's a bit like flying a plane that just lost a wing. You try lots of things to make it work but in the end that sucker is just going to crash.

I wasn't talking smack when I said that if JOB got them to 44 wins or whatever it was that I'd carry the JOB for COY sign around the circle. It was because for this team to do that it would mean he had pulled it off, he had made this roster work. I stand by that, IF he does it it will be very impressive.